Knowledge that is best defined as an understanding a person develops for a particular thing, that being learned or witnesses through interacting with wide range of objects, holds its own importance to be acquired or learned among every single individual.
Philosophers in this regard have shared their own viewpoints for this subject matter, but the work of Rene Descartes clearly defines the element in yet a philosophical way that then enforces one to further brainstorm over ideas.
Descartes consider knowledge as a thing that may appear in the form an idea. That in order to be regarded as of being absolutely true would then require a solid foundation. Just like a building would require solid foundation to stand so will the knowledge require a solid background to easily withstand against logics , critics or other forms of rational reasoning.
In this regard Descartes defended his part of knowledge in the start under mediation 1 through mathematical knowledge. That includes use of mathematics and physics side by side to build up an argument what according to him could then not be doubted. But the idea of perfect knowledge that rested upon sheer certainty led Descartes in finding his view of knowledge of not leading towards the way of absolute certainty, where use of calculations would not every time offer certainty, that apparently being Descartes goal.
Descartes then by characterizing things on the basis of perfect knowledge for every subject matter regards the perfect knowledge of being resting in the hands of thinker who made everything whereby having said this affiliating all this divine knowledge of carrying the certainty level what Descartes found of being present in God itself.
For which God is the creator and the thinker who knows everything with absolute certainty and perfect knowledge of everything.
However, since Descartes method requires justification-defeating doubt, not a belief-defeating doubt, the meditation 1 merely presents his way of thinking that is rather not justifiable but a simple belief what he has to present. This being when Descartes defines geometrical computations and knowledge resulting in absolute certainty. Where leaving with minimum doubts changing this sceptic thought by cogito ergo sum" line of thinking where affiliating new line of thinking that holds perfect knowledge as carrying more important than compared to other for which that can be best found in the God itself that holds absolute certainty. Though this may be true but since Descartes method requires justification and then defeating any doubt, was not seen in that way where it was merely about believing this certain approach rather than being taken through justifications from Descartes.
With this stated in Descartes Philosophy under Meditation 1 , the doubts what he entertains in Meditation 1 arise when Descartes considers not everything of carrying a perfect knowledge apart from the one who is the thinker, that then bestowed us off everything we still are uncertain of. Followed by this, the doubt of Descartes also supports, that, geometrical calculations cannot be doubted to a certain extent, but for the absolute certainty, that being Descartes goal, such calculations would not be meaningful if perfect knowledge is not gathered on the very first place. Hence to accomplish this Descartes defines knowing the knowledge of the thinker as being more important to be achieved and for this more important is in knowing the perfect knowledge of what God holds.
In my regard this view of Descartes for knowledge as shown by Descartes in Meditation 1 may not withstand effectively since Descartes elaborates much of the knowledge by using too much certainty every time. Where the idea of being perfectionist from every single angle, brings in much more ambiguity and then presents the Descartes philosophy in a rather unclear manner. No doubt, it is unquestionable God holds perfect knowledge, but Descartes view of being certain, as that when compared with God, accounts to an even unclear and uncertain viewpoint being shared by the philosopher, that would then always result in existence of uncertainty.
Apart from this, perfect knowledge in terms of Descartes is defined yet again in extreme way where this ideology again may not withstand by many since not every knowledge being learned can be perfect and not every other would seek out for perfect knowledge but would be more what interested in the knowledge of being rational to a desired extent and not totally perfect that then would be something out of context resulting in yet again more ambiguities and unclear ideas.
By inferring from this philosophy and a general understanding over knowledge itself, it can be best said that knowledge is something what we all are blessed it, as what makes it unclear is when we think of knowledge being similar to that of information.
When talking about humans, every single member could be best said of having information but some would be regarded of having the knowledge for which information is provided. As knowledge is something what the mind grasps and information is something what is either written down in the form of a book.
Watching TV, Reading Book Playing Games or even by seeing the society members in general, that being involved in a lot of different tasks such as shopping, playing, eating E.T.C would all seem to either exchange some sort of information , but information that then when is stored in to our brains changes into a new form and that being knowledge.
With so many sources through which a human learns be it intentionally or unintentionally it is all about retaining information in order to get the knowledge and for that what is important is the proper functioning of brain that then encourages this retention of information, which we all are blessed.
However, the extent of such retention of information among humans may whole heartedly depend on the interest, the human has for a particular subject matter. That is, does a human really wanted to retain the information what he / she is witnessing or being told to witness or will he /she merely not. Where this being said because there is no such thing can be forcefully fed into one’s brain, until and unless the person really requires a need for it to retain into his/her mind.
Hence knowledge after having inferred to what has been describe above, can be best described as information that is retained by the human mind that at the same time is better retained if it is of the interest of the human itself, disregarding what the information be, may that be for good or may that be for something bad.
Philosophy of Descartes in conclusion can be said as being logical to some extent where unveiling every single information cannot be regarded as being possible since all the answers are known to God and not just to humans whereby at some instant it is rather more irrational where the need of Descartes opting for a perfectionist way by describing need of knowledge always carrying a solid ground and by comparing such knowledge with that what God posses seems a bit irrational and unclear.
Hence in this regard, knowledge is for sure better when retained in a perfect way but when being compared in knowing as much as no other human has or will ever do, then terms as of being something irrational or something what according to Descartes view point may sound of being correct but from a general may leave a lot of ambiguity and lot of questions that itself would then have no such answers since God knows all the secrets.